The current code in reg_fits_class_p appears to be incorrect; since
offset may be negative, it's necessary to check both ends of the range
otherwise an array overrun or underrun may occur when calling
in_hard_reg_set_p. in_hard_reg_set_p should also be checked for each
register in the range of
On 30/04/12 16:19, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Richard Earnshawrearn...@arm.com writes:
On 30/04/12 15:39, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Richard Earnshawrearn...@arm.com writes:
On 30/04/12 15:07, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Richard Earnshawrearn...@arm.com writes:
On 26/04/12 14:20, Jim MacArthur
On 02/05/12 14:55, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Richard Earnshawrearn...@arm.com writes:
On 02/05/12 14:00, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Jim MacArthurjim.macart...@arm.com writes:
New Changelog text:
2012-05-02 Jim MacArthurjim.macart...@arm.com
* recog.c (reg_fits_class_p): Check both regno and
Since in 4.7, libgcc/config/aarch64/t-aarch64 only contains makefile rules for
crti.o and crtn.o and these rules are automatically added by the generic make
system, we can remove it. I have verified that ctri.o and ctrn.o are still
generated correctly.
Addition to libgcc/ChangeLog:
2012-05-28
This patch makes __aarch64_sync_cache_range a LIB2ADD and removes it
from lib1funcs.S. Since it is the only function in lib1funcs.S, that
file can be removed. It also changes the functionality of
__aarch64_sync_cache_range to use userland instructions instead of an
exception.
This should be
In response to a comment from
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg01721.html, this patch removes
t-softfp-sfdf and t-softfp-excl from the aarch64 entries in libgcc/config.host.
Every setting in these files is overridden by t-softfp.
Addition to libgcc/ChangeLog:
2012-06-01 Jim
2014 in case you
want to review them.
I am in the process of arranging copyright assignment. In the meantime, does
this look remotely OK?
2015-09-23 Jim MacArthur <jim.macart...@codethink.co.uk>
* decl.c (match_attr_spec): Add DECL_AUTOMATIC to enum. Recognise
the
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:58:41PM +0200, FX wrote:
> > I think I appreciate what you are trying to do here. I don't intend to
> > sound
> > negative here, but if the keyword AUTOMATIC does nothing
>
> The testcase given is not an example of useful AUTOMATIC. I think it is
> meant to be used
On 24/12/15 16:38, Jim MacArthur wrote:
Botstrapped and tested for regressions on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. There is
a test case for the bug included.
I missed out the test case when creating the first patch. This one
should have it.
PR fortran/69043
* scanner.c (load_file): Abort and show
to check it on a Linux system so far.
Botstrapped and tested for regressions on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. There is
a test case for the bug included.
My office is about to close for the Christmas holiday, so I apologise if
I don't respond to questions promptly.
2015-12-24 Jim MacArthur <jim.mac
Hi, I'd like to contribute this small test. I have legacy code which
uses STRUCTURE statements in common blocks, and was happy to find
Fritz's DEC support assumes ordering in STRUCTUREs, as the Oracle
compiler does.
Jim MacArthur
--
2016-09-13 Jim MacArthur <jim.macart...@codethink.co
11 matches
Mail list logo
